Is he trying to get even richer off of companies that Dems degrade all of the time?
Doesn't Edwards say he supports poor people instead of rich money-grubbing companies?
2007-08-17 09:56:04 · 10 answers · asked by junglejoe 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
"The list of companies invested in is large, but presumably well known to Edwards as a result of his well-paid advising and his massive investment in Fortress. It includes companies from a variety of industries, creating all sorts of conflicts of interest for a would-be public official. Just in the 'A's in the list we find: Advanced Medical Optics Inc., and Applera Corp. (medical); Aetna Inc., Amerigroup Corp., and Assurant Inc. (health insurance); Abbott Labs, Alpharma Inc., and Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. (pharmaceuticals); Altria Group (parent of Phillip Morris, cigarettes); American International Group (insurance); Amgen Inc. (biotech); Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, Apache Oil ..."
Yepper, Edwards has most of his money invested in the company that owns those stocks.
http://www.davidswanson.org/?q=node/865
2007-08-17 09:57:13 · update #1
He has also been making money from companies that are foreclosing on the poor in New Orleans. Interesting, huh?
2007-08-17 10:01:51 · update #2
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/08/17/post_27.html
Call Fortress Invesments on the Senator if you would like. I'm sure he would be happy to be honest about his holdings.
2007-08-17 10:04:27 · update #3
Well to be honest you got to give him a break, he invest "his" money to make more money. I do the same, and I recommend you do to. Would you have him invest in pork futures saying he supports the farmer, or Ford saying he supports the Unions, when they are losing money.
2007-08-17 10:00:39 · answer #1 · answered by libsticker 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Yes he does, hes allowed to make money, he made his money himself, didn't inherit a dime, most of us have stocks in those companies, if not directly than through pensions or funds. Dems don't degrade those companies, they want them regulated. If Edwards is willing to risk a loss by regulating them then why is that a bad thing?
Is there some sort of idea that you can't offer someone who needs it a helping hand unless you are poor yourself?
I don't understand why getting richer is such a bad thing for Democrats, but a good thing for Republicans.
Don't be so greedy, its not Christian.
2007-08-17 17:04:05 · answer #2 · answered by justa 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They've been pretty good investments recently. There have been some excellent buying opportunities in the pharmacuetical sectors in recent years, for instance. Oil obviously has been doing really well, too. Tobacco, I'm not so sure, but I believe thier legal exposure has been limitted. 'Health' is too broad a category for me to comment on.
2007-08-17 17:08:44 · answer #3 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Halliburton
2007-08-17 17:17:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
You Reps can't criticize Edwards while you praise your people for doing the exact same thing.
Either way, I'm not too big on Edwards.
2007-08-17 18:10:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes you are right and if the dems think that he's going for national healthcare when he owns stocks in the insurance companies, that's a laugh.
2007-08-17 17:02:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Can we say "jealous armchair Republican"?
Yepper!
2007-08-17 17:01:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
why do you oppose americans being successful and making money? Are you a commie or something?
2007-08-17 17:01:35 · answer #8 · answered by me 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because he's a typical hypocrite.
2007-08-17 17:01:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
yeah...an editorial (your link) is a reliable source
2007-08-17 16:59:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋